Posts Tagged ‘DHS’

Did you know that one piece of Starbucks’s banana walnut bread has 490 calories? A quick google search of “calories in banana nut bread” shows that a piece of your average, homemade version contains less than half that many. When I heard this surprising information, I couldn’t help but think of our federal government’s budget compared to the budgets of hardworking taxpayers. Taxpayers trim the fat in their family budgets and live within their means, but Washington? They don’t cut the fat, their priorities are bananas, and they’re all nuts.

Just look at former Arizona governor Janet Napolitano’s sequester shenanigans. As the Homeland Security Secretary, Napolitano oversees the nation’s airports. This morning, she claimed our airports, specifically LAX and Chicago’s O’Hare, were experiencing major delays because of sequestration “budget cuts,” which both airports have denied. Only in bloated Washington can a reduction in the rate of spending increase be considered a cataclysmic cut.

The current administration is so bananas, it manufactures crises to make cheap political points. But, this time, they just might have gone too far. Poll after poll shows that the American people want spending cuts. They know Washington can cut back. So what’s an ideologue who’s completely incapable of compromise to do? Feign catastrophe of course. For weeks, President Obama described post-sequester America as a world of near-chaos with rotting food on grocery store shelves, youth roaming the streets, and pay cuts for U.S. Capitol janitorial staff. Like so many of Obama’s nutty claims, not one of these things actually happened.

In the spirit of offering advice to those who won’t ask for it, I would suggest that DHS Secretary Napolitano put down her shovel and try to climb out of the hole she is in. Fox News is reporting that there is an increasing number of calls for her resignation following a series of missteps including issuing a report that calls me, and people like me, a threat to national security, then refusing to apologize to veterans and now saying that some of the 9-11 hijackers came in from Canada.

“I don’t know that the secretary understands the depth of the disruption that she’s caused,” Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, told FOX News on Thursday, referring to the report on extremist threats. “I think the appropriate thing to do is for her to step down and let’s move on.”

“Mr. President, fire that woman,” said Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, complaining that Napolitano’s comments on the controversial report were half-hearted. “To go on television and say your apology to be, ‘I’m sorry you were offended by this report,’ that’s no apology.”

Of course, Napolitano had an arrogant response which demonstrates she still doesn’t get it.

The drumbeat of criticism continues against Napolitano for her lumping veterans, pro-lifers and anti-immigration activists into the same category as anarchists and white supremacists.

She hasn’t apologized, but weirdly says that “if offense was taken an apology is owed.”Well, Secretary Napolitano, offense was taken – and you know it – so apologize already. Say it, “I’m sorry.” See, that’s not so hard.

Update: Here is a great post by fellow blogger Peter Roff that points out that the right-wing report is very different than the left-wing report.

Maybe it’s because it is really late at night as I write this, or it’s because I have been really, really busy and not able to focus, but this story is really confusing to me.I mean, talk about something right out of the twilight zone.Things are not as they appear, or just the opposite of what you would expect.

The Hill has a story headlined “Napolitano says thanks, but no thanks, DHS has funds” and then reports on a Senate hearing about border security.Here is a quick synopsis.

Chairman Lieberman (D-CT) said he requested $380 million for enhanced border protection.But Napolitano said that she had already found the money within the agency to make sure such enhancements are “budget neutral.”

Senator McCain jumped into the discussion and suggested that Napolitano take the money.She said she didn’t need it – that we are in difficult times and need to make do with current funds.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) jumped in and criticized Napolitano for not taking the money and said that he would support sending military to the border to deal with the drug cartel violence.

Lieberman concluded saying that he was going to work to get more funding whether Napolitano thought she needed it or not.“This is kind of war,” he said referring to the border violence.

So let me get this straight, the Chairman of the committee says he is requesting more money for border security, he is supported in that by two Republican Senators (whose position on immigration is no secret) and Napolitano says, no, wouldn’t be prudent.

I only have one question: Where in the h*** was this prudent, fiscal responsibility from Napolitano when she was the Governor?!?!?